Table 3 The Comparison of public LTCI systems in different countries

1

Campbell, et al. (2010) [19]

HEALTH AFFAIRS

Germany, Japan, and the United States

Qualitative research

It explored differences between Germany and Japan in program goals, eligibility process, scope, size, and sustainability for possible applications in the United States.

Public spending on long-term care in the United States is actually higher than in Germany, and is only slightly lower than in Japan.

2

Bakx&De Meijer& Van Doorslaer (2015) [46]

HEALTH ECONOMICS

Netherlands and Germany

Quantitative research

Using comparable data from two countries with universal public LTC insurance, the Netherlands and Germany, we examine how institutional differences relate to differences in the choice for informal and formal LTC.

System features such as eligibility rules and coverage generosity and, indirectly, social preferences can influence the choice between formal and informal care. Less comprehensive coverage also has equity implications: for the poor, access to formal LTC is more difficult in Germany than in the Netherlands.

3

Rhee et al. (2015) [2]

HEALTH POLICY

Korea, Japan and Germany

Qualitative research

This paper examined the financing systems of long-term care insurance (LTCI) in South Korea, Japan, and Germany.and draw lessons regarding revenue generation, benefits design, and eligibility.

1. Early financing ensures that the service delivery system has time to adapt because most middle-income countries lack the infrastructure for providing long-term care services. 2.One approach is to start with a limited benefit package and strict eligibility rules and expanded the program as the country develops sufficient experience and more providers became available.

4

Courbage et al. (2020) [69]

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS

Italy and Spain

Quantitative research

This article test the effect of both long-term care (LTC) public benefits and insurance on the receipt of informal care provided by family members living outside the household in Italy and Spain.

LTC public support decreasing the receipt of informal care for Spain while reject it for Italy. They tend to confirm that the effect of public benefits on informal care depends on the typology of public coverage for LTC whereby access to proportional benefits negatively influences informal care receipt while access to cash benefits exerts a positive effect.

5

Chandoevwit,&Wasi,(2020) [70]

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE

Thailand

Quantitative research

using Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to evaluate the benefits of introducing a public long-term care insurance program to a middle-income country, Thailand.

when designing a new program, translating preference information into the demand for packages and benefits of alternative schemes (the choices made available) can make the DCE results more policy relevant.